|
|
|
|
Timmy, I could only find a pic on the site from 2006. Obviously he was a very dimenutive boy and did not appear as old as he was.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
 |
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
Well, that does seem to be the case. Makes you wonder why the killer found him such a threat, really.
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
 |
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
What makes a teen boy fearful to the point of an ultimate act of heinous violence?
How about how all the kids he associates with view him?
In todays school culture, for some few, being a flamboyant gay is their thing... For the majority however it is being an accepted member of the straight community...
Now, if that straight personna is threatened in some overt way, say, by a boy who is infatuated with one of the straight community. Or what if the bot was one of the gay community who did not under any circumstances want to be outed by an already "out" boy.
The peer pressure exerted upon the "straight" boy, along with a need to remain annonymous could push him over the edge don't you think?
Might it be possible that he thought "being a murderer" is preferable to being gay at a time when he is not yet ready to be gay?
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, Timmy,
the evidence is pretty strong. Much of the punishment the law exacts is purely revengeful. Lex talionis as they say.
I remember being greatly impressed by a passage either in Utopia or Erewhon where the visitor to this strange land has a sad man pointed out to him and is told the reason he is sad is that he killed his lover in a fit of jealousy. The visitor is astonished that he is not in prison serving at least a long sentence.
It is pointed out to him that there is no point, as the 'criminal' is really repenting and is most unlikely to do such a thing again and why waste public funds and jailers for no benefit to society or to him. If he's left at large he may do something useful!
Although extreme and it ignores the feelings of those that suffered from a crime I've always felt that this argument ought to carry more weight than any other when deciding what public policy on crime and imprisonment should be.
But, for example this government makes obeisance to the Daily Mail by giving a family of a murdered person a say at the trial. I think that is wholly wrong and that they should have no say at all in what is done to the murderer.
I suspect I'm even more radical than you in this view, am I?
Love,
Anthony
PS I've been collecting books about utopias for about sixty years and still enjoy the amazingly radical ideas they can put forward. The musical banks in Erewhon are as wonderful at satirising the churches as Marcus Brigstock on "The Now Show" (radio 4).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony,
Before I have my say I must preface that I am against capital punishment under all circumstances. However, I do recognise that in some countries - and the case of the USA, in some states - it does exist.
A few years ago in another forum the matter of capital punishment was discussed. As part of my argument I brought the facts of several cases in which the execution had been badly botched. One example I gave was a case in the USA where the executioner was completely drunk. The electrocution went wrong and the criminal suffered terribly, including his hair catching fire. Another participant rounded on me: "How can you pity this criminal and what happened to him? Think of what he did to his victims!"
I replied that this objector was regarding the execution as revenge. It is not the task of the state to exact revenge: the state exacts punishment for a crime committed. A state that permits a drunkard to kill another human being in the name of the law has lost all right to exact punishment, because it too sees the death of the criminal as revenge. It has trampled the majesty of the law into the dust.
Those countries and states that do not kill criminals are saved from the danger of exacting revenge: imprisonment can only be seen as a punishment.
J F R
The paradox has often been noted that the United States, founded in secularism, is now the most religiose country in Christendom, while England, with an established church headed by its constitutional monarch, is among the least. (Richard Dawkins, 2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
timmy
|
|
Has no life at all |
Location: UK, in Devon
Registered: February 2003
Messages: 13751
|
|
|
I don't dispute it. I am aghast, simply. In either role, there but for the grace of a deity go any of us. Or self control, of course. Ofr just terror at the consequences of any action.
[Updated on: Mon, 21 July 2008 17:09]
Author of Queer Me! Halfway Between Flying and Crying - the true story of life for a gay boy in the Swinging Sixties in a British all male Public School
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This isn’t about capital punishment yet, and frankly I doubt that it will be. As to the discussion whether to try as an adult or a minor, to see him as anything other than a minor child is stupid and down right schizo.
I believe they need help more than anything else, putting them away for untold number of years will only destroy lives and if they do get out which (in this case is probably likely) after 20 or more years, we will indeed have more hardened criminals on the street, if the criminal justice system’s track record here in the US is any indication.
We need to find a way to cure not bandage that is left to fester.
People will tell you where they've gone
They'll tell you where to go
But till you get there yourself you never really know
Where some have found their paradise
Other's just come to harm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
:'-( Hey Marc, Sadly I do agree with how you see this thing. I think I can relate to how you might feel about this sort of thing as I read the story about you a long time ago and can see the reasons for your mixed feelings about these two boys. Yes, I am sure you consider Larry a victim and he sure did suffer for what he did. I am sure also you can see how that boy Brandon is going to suffer for what he did. I was always taught that "sticks and stones can break my bones, but words can never hurt me", but I am sure that both of us know that words can indeed hurt us.
We are not told whether there was much harrassment of Larry by Brandon in the weeks before he shot him. We are told that there was this sort of taunting by Larry that told others he and Brandon "dated" or were together etc. At that age I suspect that sort of accusation by someone who is admittedly gay can be a damaging thing and not easily refuted, so it does justify some anger by Brandon towards Larry. Not enough to justify what he did by any means however and I know you would agree with me on that.
I put a lot more blame on the social worker who seemed to have an agenda to make gay people more accepted in the school whether the kids or teachers wanted it or not. I think adults are able to handle such things a lot better than kids and it is wrong to put them in such a position at such a young age. It should be the school's agenda to make school a safe place for everyone and taunting in either way should be prohibited. I know that when I was in school (certainly not openly gay, but diminutive in size etc) I was very safe in school because the teachers and my peer group would not tolerate anyone being bullied and teasing was at a minimum. I did get teased to some extent, but I accepted that there was going to be some of it regardless because of my size and my really poor showing in athletics. But I never felt in danger in school and no kid should have that happen to him.
As I see it, Larry should have been restricted from wearing outlandish clothing (which girls would not be allowed also to wear) and the same goes for the makeup he wore. Now maybe some of you missed it, but it was stated that on the day Larry was killed he had come to school in his normal "boy type" clothes and not cross-dressed. So he was obviously aware he had been pushing the kids around him with his behavior and was now starting to change how he related to the other kids. Too bad that Brandon was too obsessed with taking revenge on this kid to see it.
I think really that there is sufficient guilt to go around for almost all of the staff, the kids, and the parents who knew what was going on there.
I know that Marc knows the damage hate can cause in someones life; at least in his case he lived through it. I am glad you did Marc. You show the one thing in what you said that seems lacking in all the other comments and that is the idea that there has to be some forgiveness or there will never be any peace for those involved. If we and the rest of society cannot try to understand ALL the reasons for this to happen I think we are going to see it repeated.
Ken
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Right, Arich!
And I agree with JFR too. One of my best friends at school was A P Silverman whose father was the Labour MP who, after many years of trying, got capital punishment in the UK abolished.
But children should not be punished by the law; they should be well educated and brought up by example to behave properly and with consideration for others.
If they have been taught to hate and be cruel and to bully then that lesson has to be unlearned and a new lesson learned and that can't be done in or by the criminal justice system.
And it should be completely unacceptable to be harsh on such a child to appease the anger of those that love someone he has harmed.
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
acam wrote:
> Right, Arich!
>
> And I agree with JFR too. One of my best friends at school was A P Silverman whose father was the Labour MP who, after many years of trying, got capital punishment in the UK abolished.
>
> But children should not be punished by the law; they should be well educated and brought up by example to behave properly and with consideration for others.
In the case of capital crimes, children should be punished under the law.
>
> If they have been taught to hate and be cruel and to bully then that lesson has to be unlearned and a new lesson learned and that can't be done in or by the criminal justice system.
If this is true, then that same child that grows to adulthood still has the same problems don't they? So should we treat their crimes based on their upbringing?
>
> And it should be completely unacceptable to be harsh on such a child to appease the anger of those that love someone he has harmed.
It is acceptable. Eye for an eye right?
>
> Love,
> Anthony
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No, Marc,
"An eye for an eye" is wrong, not right! That is plain revenge and nothing to do with justice or public policy. It is truly primitive and, in my view, uncivilised.
It is the 'lex talionis' that I said earlier is unacceptable.
And it isn't the same for an adult as a child. The adult is no longer being educated and 'brought up' and is (unless mentally retarded) responsible for his actions and can be held responsible by society and that is why there is (in most civilised societies) a separate law for adults and children.
And although it may not be too late surely you would agree it is much harder to persuade an adult criminal not to offend again than it is to persuade a child - although obviously a child gradually becomes an adult and doesn't suddenly change on a single day and the law does suddenly change on a single day. Well we all know the law is an ass don't we?
And surely you would agree that if there is a choice between:
1. Punishing someone so it really hurts and then having them repeat the crime
or
2. Not punishing them but re-educating them and so having the result that they don't repeat the crime
then the second choice is better and cheaper. True the sufferers from the first crime don't get revenge but there are no sufferers from a second crime because there isn't a second crime.
Of course you may say that I am living in hope because nobody knows, for sure, how to prevent a second crime, and I would agree with you. Nevertheless I would always choose solution 2 above and never solution 1. I think getting revenge is bad for people and, even if the second crime that 2 hopes to prevent is only prevented in half the criminals, the world would clearly be a better place with 2 than it would with 1.
Love,
Anthony
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
What I believe is that the courts are in place to answer these questions.
Personally, if a person can't do the time, don't do the crime.
Therefore I prefer #3... Lock them up and leave them there.
It matters not to me the criminal's age.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anthony has mentioned the Lex Talionis ("an eye for an eye") which has, of course, a biblical origin. My comment here is only indirectly related to the thread, but it really doesn't merit a new thread.
I have mentioned on a couple of occasions that the Jewish sages of old regularly used the 'right of interpretation' to change the surface meaning of biblical laws. In this case the interpretation was that the law referred to the monetary value of an eye to its owner: the malfeasor must pay damages for the loss of the eye; the extent of the damages can only be assessed by a court of law.
Would not the world be a better place if during the past 2000 years Christianity had utilized the 'right of interpretation'?
J F R
The paradox has often been noted that the United States, founded in secularism, is now the most religiose country in Christendom, while England, with an established church headed by its constitutional monarch, is among the least. (Richard Dawkins, 2006)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
unsui
|
 |
Likes it here |
Registered: September 2007
Messages: 338
|
|
|
No Message Body
[Updated on: Fri, 24 October 2008 17:57] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Perfect. The boy who shot his classmate knew he was committing a crime, and planned it ahead of time. Michael, this posting was totally right on the mark.
I know, as do four other friends, what is means to succumb to peer pressure, and engage in criminal actions. That great physics experiment we attempted two summers ago trying to see if an automobile and a two hundred year old oak tree can indeed occupy the same space at the same time ended with community service and not jail. For that, I am grateful. But at no time did any of the ten parents involved ever attempt to excuse our behavior or attempt to get us out of the consequences. In fact, I was more worried about my Father's reaction than I was the authorities' reactions. The punishment the five fathers devised for us were actually worse than what we would have faced in court.
But the consequences I had to face, and the two years of hospice volunteer work I have had to do turned out to be a maturing and helpful experience in life.
I consider myself a liberal but if this boy is capable of committing this planned and cold-blooded crime at his age, then I think he's already into the downward spiral and will only get worse.
Ironically, he should have been his victim's valentine, because he's most definitely going to be somebody's "valentine" in prison.
Life, and no parole.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
Ahhh....
But if the legal system was sidestepped then there is no social redemtion.
If the four were of households of say people that lived in the local trailer park, I think it would have been somewhat more severe than a slap on the hand and a few hours community service.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judge OKs adult trial for teen suspect
Attorney sought juvenile court for fatal shooting case
By Raul Hernandez, Ventura County Star
http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/jul/25/judge-oks-adult-trial-for-teen-suspect/
Relying on past court decisions, a judge ruled Thursday that trying a 14-year-old boy accused of murder in an adult court does not violate the constitution, swatting down legal arguments raised by the boy's attorney that it was cruel and unusual punishment to do so.
"I cannot say that this is unconstitutional," said Ventura County Superior Court Judge Douglas Daily.
Teenage defendant Brandon McInerney of Oxnard is charged with first-degree murder and a hate crime in connection with the Feb. 12 killing of classmate Larry King, 15, who sometimes wore makeup and told friends he was gay.
McInerney is accused of shooting the Oxnard youth as students worked on English assignments in a classroom at E.O. Green School in Oxnard.
Before making his ruling, Daily heard legal arguments for about 30 minutes from McInerney's lawyer, William "Willy" Quest, and from a prosecutor, Senior Deputy District Attorney Maeve Fox, on whether the teen can be tried in adult court rather than juvenile court.
In 2000, California voters approved Proposition 21, which widened prosecutors' authority to file charges in adult court against juveniles 14 and older without having to go to a judge.
Before he made his findings, the judge called for a 20-minute break to go back to his chambers to read the California Supreme Court cases cited by Quest and Fox in their legal petitions.
After his ruling, Daily set McInerney's arraignment for Aug. 7.
Outside the courtroom, Fox said: "The judge followed the law so I wasn't really surprised. I am just relieved."
Fox said Daily's ruling on the constitutionality of the state law "pretty much" eliminated the possibility of the district attorney sending McInerney's case to the juvenile justice system, where penalties are generally less severe than adult court.
"So, per the law of California, the (case) is going to stay in adult court," she said.
Quest said the district attorney took only a couple of days to file charges against his client in adult court without knowing all the facts about McInerney, King and the circumstances surrounding this case.
"The problem is their office, once they make a decision, it's hard for them to change course," said Quest.
He said this is the first he's heard that the district attorney has decided that McInerney will be tried in adult court.
During a previous courtroom hearing, Fox had indicated that the District Attorney's Office could decide to send the case to the juvenile criminal justice system after more facts came to light.
McInerney was in court wearing a white T-shirt and dark blue pants. He sat quietly, much of the time looking directly at the judge.
His mother, who has appeared at all his hearings, was sitting nearby and left in tears after the court proceedings.
Quest told the judge that he might file a writ of mandate with the Court of Appeal, 2nd District, Division Six in Ventura.
In an interview, Quest said he was disappointed by the judge's rapid decision.
"I just wished he would have spent a little more time thinking about it," said the attorney.
In the courtroom, Quest spent much of the time attacking the constitutionality of Proposition 21. He said it gives prosecutors the power to send a juvenile offender into the adult criminal justice system, where a sentence of 51 years to life, such as the one McInerney is facing if found guilty, can be given because state law mandates it.
Also, the attorney said, Proposition 21 prevents judges from looking at the facts surrounding the criminal cases of juveniles such as McInerney.
In addition, Quest said, jurors who find a juvenile guilty have no say about the sentencing.
McInerney's case, Quest told the judge, could be the first of its kind that challenges Proposition 21 based on the "cruel and unusual punishment" clause of the state and federal constitutions.
"It's a case of first impression. It's a very important case," Quest told the judge.
Fox told Daily that a judge already sits as the "13th juror" in a courtroom and can throw out a jury verdict, for example by lowering a first-degree murder to second-degree. She said this changing of a jury's verdict has been done before by judges at the Ventura courthouse.
"The law does not allow you to murder anyone at any age," Fox told the judge. She said that while she might feel "sympathy" toward McInerney because of his age, there is no legal defense for not trying him in adult court, she said.
During the hearing, Quest relied primarily on the People v. Dillon, a 1983 California Supreme Court case, to shore up his legal arguments.
In that case, a jury convicted a 17-year-old defendant of first-degree murder with gun enhancement for shooting the victim at least nine times during an attempted marijuana theft, according to Quest. After hearing all the evidence, the jury sent a letter to the trial court stating that it appeared that the "juvenile acted like a minor."
Quest stated in his legal petition, "Only after being instructed not to speculate as to why defendant was being tried as an adult did the jury reach a verdict."
In that case, the judge concurred with the jury and believed that life imprisonment was much too harsh, given the lack of maturity of the 17-year-old. The judge sentenced the defendant to the California Youth Authority.
Later, however, an appeals court ruled that the judge had no jurisdiction to sentence the defendant to the California Youth Authority. The 17-year-old received life in prison with eligibility for parole in 20 years.
Still later, the California Supreme Court reversed the appeals court and reduced the sentence to second-degree murder and ordered the trial court to sentence the defendant to the Youth Authority.
Fox told the judge that state law mandates that if there are special circumstances in a murder case involving juvenile defendants, the district attorney is required to file in adult court.
So, even if the judge sided with Quest's legal arguments, Fox said she could, hypothetically, go back and file a "lying in wait" special circumstance against McInerney and by law, the case would have to be transferred back to adult court.
© 2008 The E.W. Scripps Co.
(\\__/) And if you don't believe The sun will rise
(='.'=) Stand alone and greet The coming night
(")_(") In the last remaining light. (C. Cornell)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mulling a Troubling Murder
NEWSWEEK's cover story provoked a fierce debate over homosexuality, harassment and a school's obligation to police its students.
By Kurt Soller | Newsweek
http://www.newsweek.com/id/148817
Larry King was an openly gay 15-year-old who was shot dead by one of his middle-school classmates. Could the school have done anything to stop it?
That is the question NEWSWEEK tackled in "Young, Gay and Murdered," the cover story this week. The article drew a massive response online--more than 4,000 comments were posted through the week. Many responded to reporter Ramin Setoodeh's assertion that Larry "was a troubled child who flaunted his sexuality and wielded it like a weapon."
Yes, he was a flamboyant kid who wore high heels and makeup. But many commenters felt this characterization suggested that Larry deserved to die. "It's a sad thing that the story isn't about how our society could create such a diabolical, cold-blooded, 15-year-old-child killer," writes CaraWinter of King's assailant, Brandon McInerney, who has been charged with first-degree murder and a hate crime (McInerney's public defender has not disclosed his defense strategy, but has said the school should be blamed for failing to step in amid rising tensions between the two boys.) "Instead, it's a story about how Larry was 'disruptive' in school, taunting and 'harassing' other kids, wielding his sexuality--implying he provoked his own murder! It's lunacy, and it's disrespectful of the poor, dead child." Hundreds of others agreed that NEWSWEEK's story, which was billed as a "a tale of bullying, sexual identity and the limits of tolerance," placed the blame on King and the reaction he received at Oxnard, Calif.'s E. O. Green Junior High School. "This was an innocent young man trying to find his identity and fit in, the same issue that many of us struggled with in our youth," said Tishalyon.
While some saw the story as a saga of self-discovery, others viewed it as a tale of sexual harassment--in which King's taunting of McInerney, including rumors of a relationship as well as a valentine, crossed the line. "Larry was a bully and was allowed to get away with it because the school officials were fricking afraid to confront him because he said he was gay," wrote Divadawn. "It saddens me that the end result was death and I'm not condoning what Brandon did, but I'm also not condoning what Larry and the school officials did." Other readers wrote that "Larry should have been admonished for sexual harassment," and that given McInerney's declining grades and recent classroom disruption, "the adults in this situation should have been watching Brandon like a hawk."
Jody Huckaby, the executive director of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays, who released a statement on our story, echoed that idea: "California has a strong anti-bullying law that specifically includes our gay and transgender kids," she writes. "But it is how adults--both parents and educators--ensure the law is carried out, and that teachable moments are seized, that makes all the difference in the world." There is something to be learned here, she argues, from the death of Larry King and its coverage by the magazine. "We need to give our children the room, and the safety, to be who they are," she adds.
It seems that whenever the magazine undertakes a story involving homosexuality, many readers are quick to argue that sexual identity is a choice and that religious doctrine should have been invoked. But in King's case, we also received responses from commenters who sought to separate out the issue of homosexuality from the debate: "If a girl who was extra flirtatious, incredibly forward and very aware of her sexuality, was shot to death by a guy who didn't want her attention, would we be considering [her] a victim, or blaming her for [the] murder[?]" wrote Seabasstin. "A better analogy would be a black kid who was perceived as 'too uppity' and got shot by a white kid," adds KevinVT. "And then Newsweek writes a story about it being, OK, really, because he was acting too black, because one of his principals was a black woman, and because the African American community found the situation to be evidence of racism."
Maeve Fox, the prosecutor in this case for the Ventura County District Attorney's Office, wrote that the NEWSWEEK story was "rife with inaccuracies" due to its use of anonymous sourcing. "Much of what these anonymous sources whisper into the ears of a complicit reporter will undoubtedly evaporate when and if they are called to stand," she wrote. When our reporter called to ask if she could tell us what we got wrong, Fox declined to identify any specific errors, saying her job prevented her from doing so. But she admitted she didn't know that the school district's lawyer had asked teachers not to talk to journalists. While Fox thought the anonymous sourcing was unnecessary, Setoodeh says his story would have been impossible to tell without it.
© 2008
(\\__/) And if you don't believe The sun will rise
(='.'=) Stand alone and greet The coming night
(")_(") In the last remaining light. (C. Cornell)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
unsui
|
|
Likes it here |
Registered: September 2007
Messages: 338
|
|
|
No Message Body
[Updated on: Fri, 24 October 2008 17:57] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
marc
|
|
Needs to get a life! |
Registered: March 2003
Messages: 4729
|
|
|
The boy, Brandon made a choice..... it was well thought out and he willingly carried a gun into school with a severe purpose in mind.
He executed his plan and was successful in his intent.
Now it is time for the full weight of the law to come down on him.
While I am sorry for his choices... I can not be sorry for what lay ahead for him.
Some choices have heavy tolls attached.
Life is great for me... Most of the time... But then I meet people online... Very few are real friends... Many say they are but know nothing of what it means... Some say they are, but are so shallow...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The attorney made the comment that 51 years to life was cruel and unusual punishment, wasnt Larrys cold blooded murder cruel and unusual?
When I began college I never lost a fight, not because I was bad or built big, but I was angry and carried a 6 inch knife. Mark was the one who changed my life and probably kept me out of prison.
I have several friends who are sociologist and there is a recuring discussion that keeps coming up. There was a time when unhealthy babies died early in infancy, if they were lucky to be born at all. Now we can keep them alive and by doing that we constantly weaken the gene pool. Instead of defective genes dying out they are perpetuated. The idea of capital punishment is to eliminate the violent and "bad seed" from society. Im taking no sides in this argument, but I know it is a thorn in the sides of sociologist.
If you stand for Freedom, but you wont stand for war, then you dont stand for anything worth fighting for.
|
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
|
] 
A Place of Safety
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
